Once Again, Courts Invalidate Voters Wishes

[Intense]

I know I really should be used to Government so effectively guarding their right to act incompetently without consequence, but I'm not. I appeal to a higher authority, and ask both forgiveness and to save us from the work of our own hands. Save us from ourselves.

The basis for this has nothing to do with the merits of the case or the merits of the AZ law struck down.

This is all about expanding federal authority over the states and over immigration and election practices.

If this ruling is upheld the feds have gained significant ground in redistributing power toward the unitary executive.

Becoming more like China in so many ways.

 

[George Costanza]

Court Rules Arizona Can’t Demand Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration


"The state of Arizona cannot require documents proving citizenship for new voter registration, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today. The court ruled that a 2004 law created by Proposition 200 that made voters show a birth certificate, driver’s license or passport before registering to vote violated federal law. The National Voter Registration Act allows voters to register without documentation, but designates lying about citizenship as perjury. Election experts say non-citizen voting is infrequent enough that it has no effect on election results."

Court Rules Arizona Can’t Demand Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration The Washington Independent

Once again, non-elected judges have obviated a legitimate mandate that the people voted for...



The latest variation of totalitarianism is neither religious, nor even political: it is cultural. “Totalitarian democracy” is a term made famous by J. L. Talmon to refer to a system of government in which lawfully elected representatives maintain the integrity of a nation state whose citizens, while granted the right to vote, have little or no participation in the decision-making process of the government.

You cons just don't get it, do you? The whole PURPOSE of the courts, is to put a curb on "the will of the people" when "the will of the people" exceeds Constitutional limitations.

 

[loosecannon]

I know I really should be used to Government so effectively guarding their right to act incompetently without consequence, but I'm not. I appeal to a higher authority, and ask both forgiveness and to save us from the work of our own hands. Save us from ourselves.

The basis for this has nothing to do with the merits of the case or the merits of the AZ law struck down.

This is all about expanding federal authority over the states and over immigration and election practices.

If this ruling is upheld the feds have gained significant ground in redistributing power toward the unitary executive.

Becoming more like China in so many ways.

something like that. The more power is vested in one man, the easier it is for shadow power to control the nation thru him, rather than being frustrated in that effort by 535 independent players in a gridlocked bicameral legislature.

This is an end around our representative form of government.

 

[Moon]

Seems by the time the court gets finished with the Arizona illegal alien Act, there will be nothing left to act on. Of course, cons told us there was nothing unconstitutional about the act, and they read it themselves!! Shows how much they understand about National Health care................hehehehehee

Ruling Strikes Down Part of Arizona Voter ID Law
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
By Bob Christie, Associated Press
Phoenix (AP) - A federal appeals court has struck down a key part of Arizona's law requiring voters to prove they are citizens before registering to vote or casting ballots.

Tuesday's decision by a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the law requiring voters to prove their citizenship while registering is inconsistent with the National Voter Registration Act. That federal law allows voters to fill out a mail-in card and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but doesn't require them to show proof as Arizona's law does.

Appeals Court Judge Sandra S. Ikuta's opinion was joined by retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who heard the case as a temporary appeals court judge. The 9th Circuit's chief judge, Alex Kozinski, dissented.


Ruling Strikes Down Part of Arizona Voter ID Law | CNSnews.com

Speaking of understanding, you do know that this particular law was passed by referendum in 2004, and that Janet Napolitano was governor then, right?

 

[loosecannon]

You cons just don't get it, do you? The whole PURPOSE of the courts, is to put a curb on "the will of the people" when "the will of the people" exceeds Constitutional limitations.

While that is a purpose of the courts this AZ law wasn't a violation of the constitution.

IMO there are at least even odds that a higher court will overturn this ruling based on merits.

 

[Moon]

Federal law trumps state law, sorry that's just how it works. If the people vote on a law that's unconstitutional it's still unconstitutional and should be removed.

Unconstitutional as determined by a three judge panel. I'd like to see this issue go to the SCOTUS, because it seems odd to me that we can declare that only citizens have the right to vote, but at the same time remove any means of verifying citizenship when it comes to voting.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Got no problem with this, the 10th is clear , state law can NOT counter federal law. What I DO have a problem with is the Holder Justice Dep't not going after so called sanctuary cities. These cities are in clear violation of the 10th.

This is an interesting point, and begs analysis…

You and Timex are in error, and the source of the error may be cultural rather than legal.
1. The first question to be answered is ‘who decides on the legal requirements for voting.’
And the answer is, the state, not the federal government.

a. The people of Arizona decided that citizenship is a requirement. This is not an immigration question, which would be federal. This is simply an explanation of the voting requirements statute.

2. The basis of the Ninth Circuit is that prior registrants did not have to have to show proof of citizenship, and chose to see this as an equal rights question.

a. This is an invalid and invidious comparison, as they are not comparing any two individuals requesting registration today, but rather contemporary citizens to hypothetical citizens who lived at some previous time.

3. Why was this basis chosen?
a. As Talmon has written, this type of democracy, “Totalitarian Democracy,’ suggests that the public has the right to make decisions about how the country is run, but, in actuality, the elites fraudulently dictate all decisions.

4. We as a people have come to accept judicial decisions as,…what?...messianic. But do judges have some more astute insight than the people as a whole? No, they do not...and often the basis in not Constitutional.

a. How are judges chosen? The go to a school which is taught a la Roscoe Pound’s Progressive system of legal education: precedent rather than the Constitution as the basis for decisions.

b. Then, lawyers work with and for political parties. Here in NY, it has always been known that to become a judge, one ‘contributes’ a year’s salary to the party. Does this instill respect for the system?

Summary: the famously liberal Ninth Circuit has, as is true of so many court decisions, decided against a legitimate right of the people. There should be a method to counter the unchecked powers that the courts have assumed.

There is no reason to assume that careful and thoughtful consideration by people is any less correct than that of justices.

That is, unless you and others simply believe that we work for the government, rather than the reverse.

 

[Hillbilly123069]

They cannot card them when they register. They CAN card them when they vote.

 

[loosecannon]

They cannot card them when they register. They CAN card them when they vote.

with a driver's license or proof of citizenship?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Court Rules Arizona Can’t Demand Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration


"The state of Arizona cannot require documents proving citizenship for new voter registration, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today. The court ruled that a 2004 law created by Proposition 200 that made voters show a birth certificate, driver’s license or passport before registering to vote violated federal law. The National Voter Registration Act allows voters to register without documentation, but designates lying about citizenship as perjury. Election experts say non-citizen voting is infrequent enough that it has no effect on election results."

Court Rules Arizona Can’t Demand Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration The Washington Independent

Once again, non-elected judges have obviated a legitimate mandate that the people voted for...



The latest variation of totalitarianism is neither religious, nor even political: it is cultural. “Totalitarian democracy” is a term made famous by J. L. Talmon to refer to a system of government in which lawfully elected representatives maintain the integrity of a nation state whose citizens, while granted the right to vote, have little or no participation in the decision-making process of the government.

You cons just don't get it, do you? The whole PURPOSE of the courts, is to put a curb on "the will of the people" when "the will of the people" exceeds Constitutional limitations.

Wow have you been hornswoggled...

Too bad your education- and clearly, you have one, is limited in terms of how the legal system has been co-opted by the left, and even sadder, you will make no attempt to further educate yourself.

I think the term for folks such as yourself is 'sophomoric,' in the original sense of the word: you think you know, but you don't.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I know I really should be used to Government so effectively guarding their right to act incompetently without consequence, but I'm not. I appeal to a higher authority, and ask both forgiveness and to save us from the work of our own hands. Save us from ourselves.

The basis for this has nothing to do with the merits of the case or the merits of the AZ law struck down.

This is all about expanding federal authority over the states and over immigration and election practices.

If this ruling is upheld the feds have gained significant ground in redistributing power toward the unitary executive.

Good post...and it won't be long, then, until they decide that another Democrat constituency, felons, can vote.

 

[Intense]

I know I really should be used to Government so effectively guarding their right to act incompetently without consequence, but I'm not. I appeal to a higher authority, and ask both forgiveness and to save us from the work of our own hands. Save us from ourselves.

The basis for this has nothing to do with the merits of the case or the merits of the AZ law struck down.

This is all about expanding federal authority over the states and over immigration and election practices.

If this ruling is upheld the feds have gained significant ground in redistributing power toward the unitary executive.

Good post...and it won't be long, then, until they decide that another Democrat constituency, felons, can vote.

Like in Minnesota? How does Jesse Ventura weigh in on that Jack-In-The-Box Senator? What's his name Earl? Al? Impostor?

 

[Sarah G]

Court Rules Arizona Can’t Demand Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration


"The state of Arizona cannot require documents proving citizenship for new voter registration, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today. The court ruled that a 2004 law created by Proposition 200 that made voters show a birth certificate, driver’s license or passport before registering to vote violated federal law. The National Voter Registration Act allows voters to register without documentation, but designates lying about citizenship as perjury. Election experts say non-citizen voting is infrequent enough that it has no effect on election results."

Court Rules Arizona Can’t Demand Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration The Washington Independent

Once again, non-elected judges have obviated a legitimate mandate that the people voted for...



The latest variation of totalitarianism is neither religious, nor even political: it is cultural. “Totalitarian democracy” is a term made famous by J. L. Talmon to refer to a system of government in which lawfully elected representatives maintain the integrity of a nation state whose citizens, while granted the right to vote, have little or no participation in the decision-making process of the government.

Sorry about your luck, you're not able to discriminate against the Latino community.. Look on the bright side, you still have your racist governor and Sheriff Joe.

 

[Intense]

Court Rules Arizona Can’t Demand Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration


"The state of Arizona cannot require documents proving citizenship for new voter registration, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today. The court ruled that a 2004 law created by Proposition 200 that made voters show a birth certificate, driver’s license or passport before registering to vote violated federal law. The National Voter Registration Act allows voters to register without documentation, but designates lying about citizenship as perjury. Election experts say non-citizen voting is infrequent enough that it has no effect on election results."

Court Rules Arizona Can’t Demand Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration The Washington Independent

Once again, non-elected judges have obviated a legitimate mandate that the people voted for...



The latest variation of totalitarianism is neither religious, nor even political: it is cultural. “Totalitarian democracy” is a term made famous by J. L. Talmon to refer to a system of government in which lawfully elected representatives maintain the integrity of a nation state whose citizens, while granted the right to vote, have little or no participation in the decision-making process of the government.

Sorry about your luck, you're not able to discriminate against the Latino community.. Look on the bright side, you still have your racist governor and Sheriff Joe.

The problem with that statement, especially in Arizona, is the percentage of US Citizens with Latino blood opposed to your position. It is not about Race to us, only to you. You should consider giving more out of your own pocket, or surrendering your own job to make room for the new comers. Every Nation has a right to set their own terms on Immigration policy. That includes us. Show some civic responsibility.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Court Rules Arizona Can’t Demand Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration


"The state of Arizona cannot require documents proving citizenship for new voter registration, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today. The court ruled that a 2004 law created by Proposition 200 that made voters show a birth certificate, driver’s license or passport before registering to vote violated federal law. The National Voter Registration Act allows voters to register without documentation, but designates lying about citizenship as perjury. Election experts say non-citizen voting is infrequent enough that it has no effect on election results."

Court Rules Arizona Can’t Demand Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration The Washington Independent

Once again, non-elected judges have obviated a legitimate mandate that the people voted for...



The latest variation of totalitarianism is neither religious, nor even political: it is cultural. “Totalitarian democracy” is a term made famous by J. L. Talmon to refer to a system of government in which lawfully elected representatives maintain the integrity of a nation state whose citizens, while granted the right to vote, have little or no participation in the decision-making process of the government.

Sorry about your luck, you're not able to discriminate against the Latino community.. Look on the bright side, you still have your racist governor and Sheriff Joe.

Happily, the people of the United States are tiring of you slime, who throw around aspirsions like 'racist' as though it has any import.

And it idicts you as lacking the intellect to debate, and shows that you are too much of a sap to realize that it no longer has any impact.

To put that differently, you never learned to question, to look at the underpinings of your less-than-intuitive understanding of eschatological world views.

 

[sangha]

I see the faux "constitutionalist" wingnuts aren't very happy to see the Constitution being enforced

The wingnuts hate us for our freedoms.

 

[daveman]

Sorry about your luck, you're not able to discriminate against the Latino community.. Look on the bright side, you still have your racist governor and Sheriff Joe.

How is it racist to require proof of citizenship to vote? Are you claiming that voting in US elections is not a responsibility of citizenship, but a human right that applies to everyone regardless of citizenship?

Take your time. I can tell you haven't given this any thought.

 

[sangha]

Sorry about your luck, you're not able to discriminate against the Latino community.. Look on the bright side, you still have your racist governor and Sheriff Joe.

How is it racist to require proof of citizenship to vote? Are you claiming that voting in US elections is not a responsibility of citizenship, but a human right that applies to everyone regardless of citizenship?

Take your time. I can tell you haven't given this any thought.

It's unconstitutional. Unlike the fascist wingnuts, liberals respect the Constitution, even when they disagree with a courts ruling.

 

[Intense]

I see the faux "constitutionalist" wingnuts aren't very happy to see the Constitution being enforced

The wingnuts hate us for our freedoms.

Is it the Constitution being enforced or the incompetence of the Federal Government? Is the job being done effectively? If so there is no problem. If there is a problem, then we are being cheated and lied to about it. Seems more like a Left Wingnut Smoke Screen to me.

 

[sangha]

I see the faux "constitutionalist" wingnuts aren't very happy to see the Constitution being enforced

The wingnuts hate us for our freedoms.

Is it the Constitution being enforced or the incompetence of the Federal Government? Is the job being done effectively? If so there is no problem. If there is a problem, then we are being cheated and lied to about it. Seems more like a Left Wingnut Smoke Screen to me.

The constitution is being enforced. You would realize this if you didn't hate the Constitution so much